> >Please tell me if I'm breaking some basic tendency here. ><...> > >I am not sure about the 'levellings'; it would be nice to have some >additional explanation (mixing the moods or something). I lost my full reply a moment ago, so I will be brief. If there is no levelling, then the 1st and 2nd person dual and plural of the aorist (basic vowel a:) and perfective ( basic vowel a) are identical. This is bad, since they are two of the three main aspects. > >I wanted to continue the dual in some form, but it tends to vanish. It > >seemed to me that the dual could change into an exclusive because dual = > >two > _only_ two > _only_ undetermined number > exclusive. Does this > >development make sense? > >I kinda recall the opposite development (I forget where): 'we two' > > 'both of us' > 'both you and me' > 'we, including you'. What happened to the 1st plural form, then? > > >Also, the stress patterns for verbs changed as follows > >(P/A=penultimate/antipenultimate): > >long-vowel: PPPAAAAAA -> PPPPPPPPP > >short-vowel: AAAAAAAAA -> AAAAAAPPP > >I'm afraid I don't understand this notation. Do you list the forms in >the order you use for the person/number paradigms? Yes, except I omitted the animate 3rd person dual and plural. > ><...> > >Oh, and one final question.What does bh stand for if voiced consonants >can't > >be aspirated? Clearly this is crucial issue for native Lahabic speakers. > >I am not sure I know enough about the phonological inventory. You could >allow for a cluster like [b]+[h], or distinguish up to three voiced >labial fricatives: [w] vs. [B] (beta) vs. [v]. I _want_ an aspirated voiced stop rather the [b]+[h], but I remember reading that such a beast didn't exist. _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.